Of consciousness and unconsciousness; the animate and the inanimate

Of consciousness and unconsciousness, the living and the dead, the animate and the inanimate, the chosen and the reactive, the context and the particular:

Presumably, no mere particle or perspective of consciousness is a causal agent-in-itself to implement any change. Rather, every change in the physics that is presented in common to all is synchronized in respect of information and feedback that are contexted and accumulated from and among the empathies of every perspective of consciousness and the common Field of consciousness.

A difference between the simplest chemical or physical reaction and the response of any organism would seem to be this: In preparation for each sequence with which an organism (animal, plant, micro-organism, or cell) is to act, it will, at some level, “rationalize” or represent a decision about that which it is next to do, and such “decision” will have been made a split sequence before its brain, nervous, or capillary system will have conceived or represented the decision. IOW, no decision is made purely at the level of the brain or body of an organism or a perspective or particle of consciousness. Rather, every decision is bound up with the entire synchronizing context of the potential of a field and its sub or particulate expressions.

This begs a question: At what point does even a chemical or physical reaction become the organized response of an “organism?” Are substances that have capacity to decay radioactively “organisms,” so that a “decision” is made a split sequence before any particular radioactive atom experiences a decay? Is there some algorithm that connects to govern, such that each reaction, apprehension, or choice -- upon feedback between the universal field and each and every particle -- is universally synchronized with the eternal present? May that algorithm be an aspect of the very ground of being that is availed by an encompassing Field of consciousness?

Indeed, are all of physical masses and their causative relations mere derivatives, i.e., after-the-fact storehouses of information, for which experience, communication, and feedback are represented or signposted as our “physics”? Is mass merely a representative of information, produced to our sensation as byproduct of inter-apprehensions among a single Field of consciousness and its particulate expressions? Are our separate identities, experiences, and decisions secondary phenomena, derivative of the capacity of a common Field of consciousness to receive and synchronize responses to empathetic feedback from many connected, coordinate, particular perspectives?

In whatever way consciousness may express itself, by what means may it exercise free will? By what means may a perspective of free will “cause” a change in the information that is appreciated within the Field of consciousness that gives constitution to our common physics? Does each episode of empathetic appreciation constitute the “choice” that each perspective of consciousness experiences? Does the way a particle or perspective of conscious free will comes to appreciate that with which it empathizes constitute its “choice” for what is fed back to the Field, which filters and synchronizes like signals from every pertinent perspective and organization of perspectives, in order to translate each sequential change in the ground of being that is presented to the appreciation of all?

Based on many-sided logic, I believe we are not here because of dumb Natural Selection among vacuous voids nor because of Intelligent Design of a remote God.  Rather, we are here in respect of Conscious Design that is unfolding in interaction with an involved Field of consciousness.  I believe no particle of consciousness is a free willing or causal agent-in-itself.  Yet, I believe conscious free will does exist, and that “I” am not IT, even though I experience free will by being bound up in appreciation of it.  I believe that is reason, properly understood, to respect a universal receptivity to empathy.  Be ye empathetic.

******

GOD:  Our math is incomplete. Another way of referencing that statement is to suggest that a meta algorithm runs choices for firing and synchronizing the operations of the algorithm that establishes all parameters for those relations and interactions which we mortals are able to measure, quantify, predict, or reliably or statistically replicate or manage. That meta algorithm is beyond our mortal capacities to complete or fathom. In whatever way that meta algorithm functions, we are unable to distinguish that way as being different from how we may expect a Field of conscious free will to function.